Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


R v Siracusa

[1990] 90 Cr App R 340

Case summary last updated at 11/01/2020 14:34 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case R v Siracusa

Ds were smugglers who aimed to smuggle cannabis and heroin into UK. They were charged with conspiracy on two counts, one relating to heron and the other to cannabis. They were convicted. CA dismissed appeals on the grounds that the judge had made clear that for each count the jury had to be satisfied that the drug in question was the intended object of smuggling and that intent to smuggle one did not constitute a conspiracy to smuggle the other. They also note that the mens rea for conspiracy to commit a crime may be different to the mens rea reqired to commit the crime normally. Background organisers who do not themselves become actively involved are nevertheless liable, CONTRADICTING HL in Anderson that Ds need to intend to play some part in the agreed conduct themselves. 

R v Siracusa crops up in following areas of law